Interplay SEC filing on court filing

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
Interplay has filed an 8-K summing up its court dealings with Bethesda, which tells us nothing new but is easier on the eyes than frymuchan's rather biased take.<blockquote>On October 16, 2009, Interplay Entertainment Corp. (“Interplay”) answered the lawsuit filed by Bethesda Softworks LLC (“Bethesda”) in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland on September 8, 2009. In conjunction with its Answer, Interplay asserted Counter-Claims against Bethesda seeking affirmative relief, including for Breach of Contract, Declaratory Judgment, and other relief. Interplay alleges Bethesda breached the terms of Asset Purchase Agreement related to the sale of the FALLOUT® intellectual property to Bethesda.

Interplay’s counter-suit alleges that Bethesda interfered with Interplay’s business, including distribution of the previously released FALLOUT ®, FALLOUT® 2, and FALLOUT® Tactics games, by attempting to terminate Interplay’s distribution rights, among other acts. Interplay asks the Court to decide whether Bethesda’s attempt to terminate Interplay’s rights under the Asset Purchase Agreement results in nullification of the entire contract such that the Parties should be returned to the status quo under their former Exclusive Licensing Agreement. If the Exclusive Licensing Agreement is restored, Bethesda may owe royalties based upon sales of its FALLOUT ® 3 title. Interplay also seeks a declaration from the Court that it has not infringed upon the FALLOUT® mark and that it has satisfied the terms of a Trademark Licensing Agreement it signed with Bethesda related to Interplay’s production of a massively-multiplayer online game.

For its part, Bethesda seeks to cancel the Trademark License Agreement, which conditionally allows Interplay to use the FALLOUT ® brand in conjunction with its currently-in-production massively multiplayer online game. Bethesda claims that Interplay breached the trademark license agreement because it allegedly failed to commence full scale development and satisfy a funding requirement within a specified time frame. Bethesda also seeks to terminate Interplay’s rights with respect to Interplay’s distribution of the FALLOUT® back catalog of games. Interplay disputes these allegations. Although the potential damages are currently unknown, if Bethesda ultimately prevails, Bethesda could obtain a damages award and cancel the trademark license agreement. Interplay could lose its license to use the FALLOUT® brand with respect to its massively multiplayer online game, and also its right to distribute the pre-existing FALLOUT® titles.</blockquote>Link: Interplay 8-K Filing with SEC.
 
I seriously doubt Herve will get the Fallout license back. As many have said before, he'll at most retain the rights to sell the Fallout games that were released by Interplay.
 
Herve doesn't deserve Fallout. We all recall that it was Herve who pushed FO:BOS, so him getting the license back doesn't mean a good thing for Fallout.

If somehow both Bethesda and Interplay lose the Fallout license and it's up for grabs (which I seriously doubt), I would hope that Brian Fargo would obtain the rights. But this seems extremely unlikely. I have my bets on Bethesda winning this case.
 
Better to win the weaker force, then. In this case, the weaker force is Interplay, so long live Interplay!

And for the record, I'd take a FOPOS over Fallout 3 any time. Not that I'd play any of them, but at least the first didn't sell well and didn't convince people that Fallout is all about shooting things and xplushans.
 
Mikael Grizzly said:
It's kind of like the Eastern Front. No matter who wins, the Jews are still dead.

I lol'd

Rufus has a good point that both sides definitely do not deserve the license.

But my hopes are with Interplay in this matter.
 
Ya know....I don't even have a god damn clue what is going on with that crap anymore.
 
Morbus said:
Better to win the weaker force, then. In this case, the weaker force is Interplay, so long live Interplay!

And for the record, I'd take a FOPOS over Fallout 3 any time. Not that I'd play any of them, but at least the first didn't sell well and didn't convince people that Fallout is all about shooting things and xplushans.

Actually I disagre there - while I'm unhappy with many things about Fallout 3, at least it has some entertainment value as a game in its own right, and its sucess has made more people notice the Fallout franchise, a new generation is playing the original Fallout games. On the other hand, BOS is something that would turn people OFF the Fallout franchise. If Interplay released another crappy game like BOS then people would either just not care about Fallout anymore or think "Bethesda did a better job", either of which would not be good.

I have some hopes regarding Fallout: Las Vegas. I'm hoping the team working on that might be able to produce a game that has the few good aspects of Bethesda's Fallout 3 and strip away the awfulness, and restore some of the good stuff from the old games.

Of course, if Interplay produced a new Fallout game (perhaps the MMO) and it was actually GOOD, that would be the best result. But given BOS and Interplay's awful business tactics over the past decade, I find it hard to imagine.
 
Frankly I'm even nervous about Fallout New Vegas. It's a lot of guys from the Fallout 2 team, and we all saw how New Reno turned out.. Great quests, but it seemed like you stepped into a different game when you went there.

If Fallout NV has 30's style mafia gangsters with tommy guns and fedoras, I won't even play it.
 
Beelzebud said:
Frankly I'm even nervous about Fallout New Vegas. It's a lot of guys from the Fallout 2 team, and we all saw how New Reno turned out.. Great quests, but it seemed like you stepped into a different game when you went there.

If Fallout NV has 30's style mafia gangsters with tommy guns and fedoras, I won't even play it.

If you see the posts with requests to have New Vegas be like New Reno, also full with gangster families, you would think they would only be happy if its revealed in the end that the place is being run by resurrected cyborg Al Capone.
 
It would be "funny" if MCA, JES, Feargus et al were to complete New Vegas and had about one GOTO to go, when suddenly the legal proceedings threw the game into legal limbo. Many nooses would be slung from the ceiling at Obsidian.
 
Why the hatred for Obsidian Per?

They aren't exactly the last holy grail of RPG'ing as we make them out to be, but what else do we have outside indie teams?
 
Would be creepy if Herve managed to cancel yet another J.E. Sawyer game.

BTW, would sure be interesting to see the contract between IPLY and Beth. Anyone willing to leak it?
 
If Bethesda lost the rights, I think that wouldn't mean the Obsidian deal would be off. If anything, the royalties would shift, but what's been settled has been settled, and if Interplay tried to cancel new vegas, obsidian'd probably have legal grounds to counter-sue (or something).
 
Morbus said:
what's been settled has been settled.

Nope. Change of ownership of intellectual property means you need to renegotiate with the new owner, since you can't sub-license IP from someone who doesn't own it, which is what Glutton Creeper did and Obsidian would be doing.
If we were to revert to the previous contract, the Las Vegas deal would be reneged by default, and would have to be redrafted either as a Fallout 3 expansion or title licensed to Interplay (which brings a new shitbucket in since it uses Bethesda tech).

Luckily this is all flights of fancy anyway.
 
If IPLY won (which is still not very likely) and the deal reverted to the one that allows Beth to make 3 Fallout games (or Fallout 3, 4 and 5, it's hard to say without seeing the actual agreement), Bethesda could just release New Vegas as one of these (renaming it to Fallout 4 if necessary), although they might decide to keep the precious life for their own games and just axe New Vegas. Or they could possibly release NV as a Fallout 3 expansion, while still keeping the 4 and 5 rights.
 
Back
Top